Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
393 bytes added ,  21:03, April 4, 2008
Line 274: Line 274:     
LOL!  Sounds utterly, almost European in logic, and certainly liberal. Here in America, we have a saying:  "You made your bed. Now lie in it." Please don't expect the rest of the world to agree with your efforts to hide from plain view your most obvious traits. Perhaps Ed Poor will consider a reading plan for you so that the veil can be lifted from your eyes. "Andy" is a noted expert on liberal apology, and as such, always germain to the discussions here. It is clear you recognize that fact because of your stated aversion it!  --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</font></sup> 07:51, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
 
LOL!  Sounds utterly, almost European in logic, and certainly liberal. Here in America, we have a saying:  "You made your bed. Now lie in it." Please don't expect the rest of the world to agree with your efforts to hide from plain view your most obvious traits. Perhaps Ed Poor will consider a reading plan for you so that the veil can be lifted from your eyes. "Andy" is a noted expert on liberal apology, and as such, always germain to the discussions here. It is clear you recognize that fact because of your stated aversion it!  --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</font></sup> 07:51, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
:''European'' logic? Just logic, I reckon. Good old conservative logic. American logic. Ancient Greek logic. Logical logic. BTW, I also agree with Underscoreb. The discussion page on Dawkins proves nothing - even we accept the premise that Dawkins himself is an evil liberal. You cannot prove a generality by quoting a number of instances. (And you cerraainly can't prove anything by appealing to authority.) [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 08:07, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
+
:''European'' logic? Just logic, I reckon. Good old conservative logic. American logic. Ancient Greek logic. Logical logic. BTW, I also agree with Underscoreb. The discussion page on Dawkins proves nothing - even if we accept the premise that Dawkins himself is an evil liberal. You cannot prove a generality by quoting a number of instances. (And you certainly can't prove anything by appealing to authority.) [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 08:07, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
    
::Don't be a d***. You know full well that rational thought is not restricted to the laws of [[deduction]]; see also [[induction]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 08:10, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
 
::Don't be a d***. You know full well that rational thought is not restricted to the laws of [[deduction]]; see also [[induction]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 08:10, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
Line 287: Line 287:     
:::''Pragmatically'' what this encyclopedia needs is less <u>obfuscation</u>, and chipping away by internationalists, of the conservative, American, POV of Conservapedia, to make it read neutral.  Moving something ''Europeans'' and liberals don't agree with, to another article, is censorship. If liberal users disagree with the conservative point of view of CP, they should give up trying to change it, and find a liberal/internationalist encyclopedia to edit, IMO.  If they did, two-thirds of these needless arguments would be eliminated, IMO. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</font></sup> 16:04, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
 
:::''Pragmatically'' what this encyclopedia needs is less <u>obfuscation</u>, and chipping away by internationalists, of the conservative, American, POV of Conservapedia, to make it read neutral.  Moving something ''Europeans'' and liberals don't agree with, to another article, is censorship. If liberal users disagree with the conservative point of view of CP, they should give up trying to change it, and find a liberal/internationalist encyclopedia to edit, IMO.  If they did, two-thirds of these needless arguments would be eliminated, IMO. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</font></sup> 16:04, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
::::I think RossC's suggestion is a good one. Not because "calling anyone they agree with a 'professor'..." is not a liberal trait (though no one has yet demonstrated that it is), but because (as a couple of others have said) it isn't a political or quasi-political belief like the other items in the list, and it looks out of place here. [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 17:03, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
333

edits

Navigation menu